Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    June 23, 2013 11:00pm-11:31pm PDT

11:00 pm
collectively to generate more revenue so it could be shared equitably across the city's priorities particularly the areas that hit hard by the state and federal cuts. also according to the budget and legislativeanalyst and it's as was said the number of children were stated and i encourage you give the budget back for district 6. there is more than enough in the budget to meet all of the needs in the community, members and voters by the board of supervisors being diligent and thoughtful and responsible when approving the final budget so please invest equally all of san francisco and support district 6's budget. thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker please. >> good afternoon i am angela
11:01 pm
and currently attending san francisco state university. i am a product of the youth programs south of market. i help coordinate youth empowering soma and we did see -- like we do have a fluctuation of youth involved in the program. we started with six youth in 2010 and now 2013 we gained 15 more youth from when i started so this program is vital to the community because we see a lot of problems in the community that are not addressed because there is not youth programs that talk about that did because of that i am involved than just this group. i am seeing more programs and trying to figure out how to help the your better and i hope you realize there are youth in the community and south of market that are in need of the programs and it's positive factor to be involved because it will help them shape their identities and be part of a successful society in the
11:02 pm
future so thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker please. >> hi good afternoon. my name is maria. i speak little english. [speaking spanish]
11:03 pm
>> good afternoon. i mamary marin. i am speaking on behalf of this group south of market district. if youth programs are cut single mothers like myself have to worry about where the children spend their time when i'm at work or after school activities and most of the youth are low income youth. a lot of them are sro's and i am asking for funding for sro's and asking you put money back in toward the youth. she wants me to say that this part she has written down. even with the incredible growth in the mayor's budget and the city has unmet needs the supervisor ask and to make the budget whole. the current proposal is balanced on top of
11:04 pm
the vulnerable communities, seniors families and people with hiv/aids and others and the impacts impact the entire family city. more homeless on the street, more families can't keep their accessing and youth with access to jobs and health services creates instabilities city wide. >> thank you. >> thank you. next speaker please. >> hello good afternoon supervisor. my name is charm. i am with the after school program and summer program and the after school program in betty carmichael educational center south of market and representing the ywca and for the stakeholders. this group
11:05 pm
has been crucial for the community in terms of supporting immigrant families that are newly arrived and i had the pleasure to check in with a lot of the families and they're really struggling in terms of just having availability of housing, jobs and opportunity are for their children to have a safe place to stay in the programs and i want to reiterate there is more than enough budget to meet all of these needs so we as a community members and voters ask that the board of supervisors be diligent and thoughtful and responsible when approving the final budget and you can't afford to rubber stamp such a critical policy document. we must work together to create a budget that helps all san franciscans to be part of the recovery and make san francisco whole and thriving and functioning so please invest by supporting the district 6
11:06 pm
budget. thank you very much for listen listening. >> okay. thank you very much. any other members of the public -- if there are members of the public please line up on the far wall and we will get to you. all right. >> hello supervisors. address those on the budget committee today. what incredibly moving stories we have heard over the day. there is so much need in the city and probably now more than ever we have seen one of the highest levels of displacement in san francisco history and surpassing the 2001 bub and he will any of the budgetary elements go toward off setting and supplying and creating because where i see the lack is where we have some services and approach towards the disadvantaged in san francisco. we have very little assistance for work force housing. anything that is affordable those making 25 to $60,000 a year and those in the yards are making 15 to 30 if
11:07 pm
they're lucking and we should look for opportunities of sites that sat dorm at and other areas and probably cost $50,000 to renovate the bunkers for affordable housing until you're finally ready to do development on that site so maybe there are opportunities to look at that but please don't cut the social services and immediately on a planning department side there is a budgetary item that is currently pushing off the community development fees. this plan was implemented during the lowest part in the economy and we have more construction than ever so the current policy that exempts our developers or those fees that policy should be reversed and we will have continued input into the funds to support these services. thanks for your time. please support the arts whenever possible in your budgeting decisions today. >> thank you. next speaker.
11:08 pm
>> i am gabriel and speaking on advocate for more work force development system with folks with barriers of employment and support the providers including jbs, self help for the elderly and many other groups. we appreciate your efforts of the mayor and rhonda simpsons and requesting these funds for development so folks can maintain employment in san francisco. it's critical to fund these programs to enhance the economic stability and prosperity of san franciscans so they can compete for the jobs and stay in san francisco. metaas you know is a community based local economic development agency. it's located in the mission district of san francisco for nearly 40 years. we have been work to improve
11:09 pm
social conditions in the neighborhood and stimulating investment and enhancing the business environment and jobs for the residents. it's critical to fund the programs to maintain that. we had a huge displacement of our community in the mission district and all around an fran and it's all over and funding these programs will help keeping programs in san francisco. thank you very much. >> thank you. next speaker please. >> thank you for listening today supervisors. i debbie her man with the health and services network and i am here with the nonprofits and here to support the budget enhancement request. this is i group of asks put together by nonprofits, by the people that work for us, by the people that are served for us. there are several different
11:10 pm
areas. first of all we have been cutting the budgets for years. the economy is coming back and it's time to restore services for the most vulnerable and secondly it's unnecessary to accept a unprecedented two year two cut to determine the services. third, it's a priority to back hill hiv/aids cuts in the budget and it's important to fund a cost of doing business nonprofits who have lost 12% de facto budget cut over the last five years. that money will provide social justice for the workers that need raidses, health increases and rent increases and save programs that are threatened by years of flat funding. the money is there. we ask your support to redirect resources and i know there is a
11:11 pm
list with many ideas where you can find the funding including suspending the budget stabilization reserve and the budget analyst's recommendations. it's not about not having the resources but what we prioritize and we want the riez directed to where they can do the most good. thank you very much. >> thank you very much. any other members of the public that wish to comment at this time? okay. seeing none public comment is closed. colleagues we have a number of items in front of us and we're going to act on a bunch of them. let's take them one by one or in groupings here and go down in order. the first here is a hearing for dcyf where ms. sue came earlier today and held off comments and can i have a motion to continue item one until next wednesday. >> so moved. >> mr. chairman the agenda for
11:12 pm
wednesday has been published. i don't believe i can get that on there. >> mr. city attorney -- >> deputy city attorney job gibner. so you could -- i believe everybody within that hearing could be discussed at part part of the budget when the department comes back. >> okay colleagues let's file this and continue to talk about these items when ms. sue comes before us again. >> that's fine. >> motion to file number one without obsigz. so moved. items two and three are the budget so can i have a motion to continue to monday the 24. we do so without opposition. so moved. items number four and five regarding treasure island
11:13 pm
development authority and the office of community investment infrastructure and continue those to wednesday the 26. so moved. okay. >> mr. chairman i believe those are not on the agenda for wednesday. i believe those -- >> thursday. my apologize. motion to rescind the vote. okay. so we're going to do it for thursday. >> continue to thursday. >> okay. continue to next thursday. do that without opposition. so moved. item number six and seven have to do with the botanical garden so first i know supervisor breed had discussed with rec and park who i believe are here if there are additional questions rec and park introduced a substitute lease as well as substitute ordinance reflecting supervisor
11:14 pm
breed's comments. we might have a split vote here but could i have a motion to accept the lease. >> has it been amended? >> no. we have accept it now and accept the lease changes as discussed by supervisor breed. okay. do we need a roll call vote on this one? >> [inaudible] >> okay. to amend. okay r. we can do so without opposition. okay. >> i believe these are listed on the wednesday june 6 agenda for next week. if you wish to continue to that date. >> mr. city attorney. >> the committee could act on those today and then they would be removed from the agenda or you could continue it to next week. >> all right. i think it is what it is so let's act on it today so on items six and
11:15 pm
seven. take them as a joint vote. we need a roll call. >> let's do roll call on those. >> on item six and seven. supervisor mar. >> actually i'm going to vote yes on the lease and no on the fees. >> separate it out. >> item number six. supervisor mar. >> aye. >> supervisor avalos. >> [inaudible] >> avalos no. >> supervisor breed. >> aye. >> supervisor wiener. >> aye. >> supervisor farrell. >> aye. >> the motion passes. on motion number seven. supervisor mar. >> no. >> supervisor avalos. >> no. >> supervisor breed. >> aye. >> supervisor wiener. >> aye. >> supervisor farrell. >> aye. >> the motion passs. >> to be clear those are
11:16 pm
forwarded to the full board for the meeting july 16. >> july 16. >> okay. those motions pass. those items pass. item number eight we have some amendments mr. city attorney to item eight. >> yes. john gibner deputy city attorney again. two items that have been requested which the board can take with one vote. one is change out dated references to the art commission to the current name arts commission and the second is to change the type of fund for the war memorial to a category four fund which is an interest bearing fund. >> okay. colleagues any questions on those? can i have a motion to accept the amendments. >> so moved. >> so moved. and can i have a motion to move the item to the
11:17 pm
full board. do so without opposition. okay. item nine. can i have a motion to move it to the full board. >> so moved. >> july 16 without opposition. similar motion number 10 to move to the full board on july 16. >> so moved. >> do so without opposition. >> item 11 similarly we need some amendments mr. city attorney. >> john gibner deputy city attorney again. this is just fixing some section numbers typos. >> okay. colleagues any questions? can i have a motion to amend -- per the city attorney's comments do so without opposition. move item 11 to the full board for july 16 as amended. do so without opposition. item number 12 mr. city attorney i believe we have amendments as well. >> yes. on this one a few numbering fixing which i believe has been distributed as well as
11:18 pm
medical examiner office asked us to delete the term over night processing for the fee to reflect what the fee is for. >> okay. colleagues if no questions can i have a motion? >> so moved. >> motion to move 12 to the full board as amended. do so without opposition. mr. city attorney i believe we have amendments for item 13 as well. >> this one is just amendment to the title to reflect the actual content of the ordinance. >> motion to amend item 13 to the city attorney's comments. >> so moved. >> do so without opposition and move 13 to the full board july 16 board meeting. do so without opposition. mr. city attorney i believe item 14 needs to be amended as well. >> this is the last time i'm going to speak today. this is an amendment to accept the proposals of the budget analyst which he described on wednesday. it would provide that the
11:19 pm
library could accept gifts up to $100,000 without board approval but need approval for larger groups and eliminate the grant fund originally in the ordinance. >> actually i thought -- >> supervisor wiener. >> i thought that the recommendation was just to remove the provision that exempted the library from the normal acceptance expense but still create the funds. >> the ordinance addressed two different types of funds. one for gifts to the library which usually require board approval if they're over $10,000 so this amendment would provide that the library could say they can accept gifts up to $100,000 and the second is for grants and the budget analyst didn't address grants in this ordinance. >> okay and subject to the normal rules. >> exactly. >> okay thank you.
11:20 pm
>> colleagues any further questions? could i have a motion? without opposition. all right. motion to move 14 forward to the full board for the july 16 meefing. >> so moved. >> do so without opposition. colleagues i'm going to propose taking 15 through 23 together and motion to move to the full board for the july 16 board meeting. >> so moved. >> do so without opposition. item 23 is the -- >> item 24. >> yeah item 24 is regarding the stabilization reserve. can i a motion to continue this item. >> so moved. >> okay. can we do so without opposition? mr. clerk do we have any other items? >> that concludes the agenda. >> we are adjourned.
11:21 pm
11:22 pm
>> welcome to the regular meeting of the transportation finance authority. my name is malia cohen. to the left is commissioner katy tackvthv. joining us will be supervisor chiu. and to my right are commissioner scott and i think mark farrell is going to be coming back shortly. i would like to thank sfgtv, charles and jessie for their service behind the camera. madam clerk, today is erica chang, also, madam clerk, are there any other -- are there any announcements? >> there are no announcements today. >> there are no announcements, great. okay, let's call item number 2.
11:23 pm
>> item number 2, approve the minutes of the may 14, 2013 meeting. this is an action item. >> okay. is there any member of the public that would like to speak on this item? >> okay, seeing none, public comment is closed. ~ [gavel] all right, so moved. >> all right, so moved. madam clerk, will you please call item number 3? yes, i'm sorry, the motion was passed without objection. >> item number iiictiontion state and federal legislation update. this is an information update, action item. >> and i think we have a presentation. excellent. >> good morning, chair and members. i've got a brief report for you today. on the legislative matrix we have two new changes we'd like to call to your attention and highlight. there are two other bills i'd like to discuss briefly and a cap of where we stand vis-a-vis the state conference committee by virtue of some of the actions they took last night
11:24 pm
and as they get ready to wrap up the budget this week. as for the new positions, ab4 66 by assembly member silva, that deals with affirming the state law, the cmac, distribution formula, the federal funds that passed through the state to regional entities. it maintains consistency with past practice and we're recommending support of this measure at this point in time. in addition, sb7 92 is a little more complicated. this was a bill that popped up in between meetings earlier this year that would have partially undone the tax swap adjustment to the excise tax on fuel. if you might have read in the paper, the board of equalization approved the ministerial adjustment of the tax rate pursuant to the tax spot and added 3 cents a gallon
11:25 pm
to take effect july of this coming year. and a senator from southern california introduced legislation that would have afforded the ability of the board of equalization to do that on its own and would have required a legislative vote. a number of folks went to work and that bill was, i won't say killed, but it was held over until next year. however, because of its technical parliamentery nature of the bill, it is still available at any point in time. so, staff and i are recommending an opposed position to reject any ability to change that board of equalization action and go back -- and stay at current law. that would give you the opportunity in the event that the author takes the bill up in the end of session or tries to do something early next year, we would have an opposed position approved if you so concur. those are the two bills where we have new positions to present to you. i have talked from time to time
11:26 pm
about sb 11 and ab8. those are measures that would extend the carl moyer funding as well as ab 118 funding. some of that money is very important to projects here in san francisco. we have been supporting it and i'm happy to report that sb 11 by senator paply has continued to move and is now in the assembly and it has not been set for a hearing but it is intended to be heard very shortly. the dent companion bill identical ab8 by assembly member parea didn't make it out of the assembly. there was a short matter when the house was going to take it up. it can still by virtue of its parliamentery condition still be taken up at any time in the assembly so it may well move, but people may defer to sb 11. so, those bills are -- at least one of those bills is moving and i'll just make this last note on sb 11. it did enjoy half a dozen republican votes. kind of the last time we've seen a tax measure with
11:27 pm
somewhat of a bipartisan vote. so, i have a pretty good hopes that one or the other of those bills will go to the governor and thus replenish the carl moyer funding in the future. in terms of the budget, there are a cup of items of particular interest. one was the proposal by the end administration to consolidate a number of programs, safe routes to school, bike facilities, the environmental mitigation fund into a single acts of transportation program mirroring what had happened in map 21. but at the state level for state resources. ~ and the administration ran into some opposition from the bike pit organizations around the state. there were some aspects of the proposal that they didn't like. the workout as adopted last night was to go ahead and approve the appropriations, about 130 million for the next year for this new program, but not provide the program parameters until later
11:28 pm
legislation is adopted after a stakeholder meeting is convened by the transportation agency sometime in august. so, there's more work to be done on that. the appropriation is good, but now to get the framework in place we'll need to do legislation and have the governor approve it. so, that's work yet to be done this summer. i talked also from time to time about the cap and trade and, you know as you know it's gone from a billion dollar proposal a year and a half ago. it was updated this year by the governor to be a lesser amount reflective of the auction revenues from cap and trade coming in at a lower level than had originally been projected. closer to about half a billion for the remainder of this year and through next year. and then in the may revision, the governor did propose in lieu of expending those funds for greenhouse regas reduction purses, instead that money be loaned to the general fund. the senate had adopted the governor's proposal ~ after
11:29 pm
much consideration. the assembly took a different approach. they said, well, we'll agree to 400 million of the 500 million being parked in the general fund for a year, but wanted to expend the $100 million. as a result of yesterday's in a moment of a larger scale of budget agreement, one element of that was simply to agree by all parties that a half billion dollars that the governor is projecting would be loaned to the general fund and the assembly proposal is off the table now. ~ moment there's probably a lot of reasons why the governor is pushing for that, some of which could have to do with pending lawsuits and concern about making appropriations, expending the funds, and having a legal action in an adverse way and requirements that and obligation the state would be under at that point in time. so, with that uncertain if i i think he's taken a prudent course. it's disappointing a lot of agentv size would like to put that money to work reducing greenhouse gas emissions
11:30 pm
throughout the state, but nevertheless the governor has prevailed at this point in time. finally, there was a proposal aligned with a public/private partnership affiliated with the long beach port courthouse project under the department of general services. it went beyond simple reporting like you normally see and would have imposed upon the p-3 regime that's available to transportation agencies. some significant new hurdles, some burdens. we were at the forefroth of resisting that under the theme that we wanted to keep as many financing tools available. ~ forefront and i'm happy to report as of last night i was informed but all four leader's offices that is off the table now thev so, the current p-3 tool would remain available without incumbrance of a new bureaucratic process for projects to be put through. so, with t,